Re: BGSOUND, no need for it

Foteos Macrides (MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU)
Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:53:46 -0500 (EST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Jeff Leane: "Why IDML exists (was: What are the problems with IDML?)"
Previous message: Matthew James Marnell: "Re: What are the problems with IDML? (fwd)"
Maybe in reply to: Imagination's End: "BGSOUND, no need for it"

Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:53:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU>
Subject: Re: BGSOUND, no need for it
To: connolly@w3.org
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Message-id: <01I8QFANN06Y001302@SCI.WFBR.EDU>

"Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>In message <321E2142@smtpgate.ftt.com>, "Jason O'Brien" writes:
>>
>>Why NOT have a BGSOUND tag?
>
>Cuz they should have just used the followig markup for that feature:
>	<link rel=present href="foo.wav">

	Better yet:
	
	<link rel=present href="foo.wav" title="brief descriptive string">

That would allow clients which implemented the HTML+/HTML 3.0 banner
mechanism to make the resource known and "bookmarkable" under circumstances
when a sound player is not availbale to the client (e.g., it might matter
to US citizens if it's a background soundtrack from the president on the
White House Home Page :).

				Fote

=========================================================================
 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
=========================================================================

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Jeff Leane: "Why IDML exists (was: What are the problems with IDML?)"
Previous message: Matthew James Marnell: "Re: What are the problems with IDML? (fwd)"
Maybe in reply to: Imagination's End: "BGSOUND, no need for it"